This decision addresses the issue of whether a police officer had reasonable and probable grounds to arrest the accused, Silvia Taboada, for impaired driving by drug, following a motor vehicle collision.
The officer, PC Zold, relied on observations including the accused's behavior, physical signs, and information from dispatch, despite not smelling alcohol and lacking training in standard field sobriety tests.
The court found that the officer had both subjective and objective reasonable grounds to arrest and demand breath samples, dismissing the accused's Charter application.
The decision also includes a detailed section 24(2) analysis, ultimately admitting the breath test evidence as reliable and critical to the Crown's case.
